FBI raids houses for clicking a link
 

The FBI has recently adopted a novel investigative technique: posting hyperlinks that purport to be illegal videos of minors having sex, and then raiding the homes of anyone willing to click on them.

Undercover FBI agents used this hyperlink-enticement technique, which directed Internet users to a clandestine government server, to stage armed raids of homes in Pennsylvania, New York, and Nevada last year. The supposed video files actually were gibberish and contained no illegal images.

A CNET News.com review of legal documents shows that courts have approved of this technique, even though it raises questions about entrapment, the problems of identifying who's using an open wireless connection--and whether anyone who clicks on a FBI link that contains no child pornography should be automatically subject to a dawn raid by federal police.

Roderick Vosburgh, a doctoral student at Temple University who also taught history at La Salle University, was raided at home in February 2007 after he allegedly clicked on the FBI's hyperlink. Federal agents knocked on the door around 7 a.m., falsely claiming they wanted to talk to Vosburgh about his car. Once he opened the door, they threw him to the ground outside his house and handcuffed him.

Vosburgh was charged with violating federal law, which criminalizes "attempts" to download child pornography with up to 10 years in prison. Last November, a jury found Vosburgh guilty on that count, and a sentencing hearing is scheduled for April 22, at which point Vosburgh could face three to four years in prison.

The implications of the FBI's hyperlink-enticement technique are sweeping. Using the same logic and legal arguments, federal agents could send unsolicited e-mail messages to millions of Americans advertising illegal narcotics or child pornography--and raid people who click on the links embedded in the spam messages. The bureau could register the "unlawfulimages.com" domain name and prosecute intentional visitors. And so on.

"The evidence was insufficient for a reasonable jury to find that Mr. Vosburgh specifically intended to download child pornography, a necessary element of any 'attempt' offense," Vosburgh's attorney, Anna Durbin of Ardmore, Penn., wrote in a court filing that is attempting to overturn the jury verdict before her client is sentenced.

In a telephone conversation on Wednesday, Durbin added: "I thought it was scary that they could do this. This whole idea that the FBI can put a honeypot out there to attract people is kind of sad. It seems to me that they've brought a lot of cases without having to stoop to this."

Durbin did not want to be interviewed more extensively about the case because it is still pending; she's waiting for U.S. District Judge Timothy Savage to rule on her motion. Unless he agrees with her and overturns the jury verdict, Vosburgh--who has no prior criminal record--will be required to register as a sex offender for 15 years and will be effectively barred from continuing his work as a college instructor after his prison sentence ends.

How the hyperlink sting operation worked
The government's hyperlink sting operation worked like this: FBI Special Agent Wade Luders disseminated links to the supposedly illicit porn on an online discussion forum called Ranchi, which Luders believed was frequented by people who traded underage images. One server allegedly associated with the Ranchi forum was rangate.da.ru, which is now offline with a message attributing the closure to "non-ethical" activity.

In October 2006, Luders posted a number of links purporting to point to videos of child pornography, and then followed up with a second, supposedly correct link 40 minutes later. All the links pointed to, according to a bureau affidavit, a "covert FBI computer in San Jose, California, and the file located therein was encrypted and non-pornographic."

more at http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-98...?tag=nefd.lede

damn....

if this is not entrapment, what is? LOL

my favorite is the cops who pretend to be underage girls online, our tax dollars at work.

damn pedo net

thats fucked!

As long as there is profit in convicting people of crimes this shit will continue and get worse.

this is actually not a bad thing... some weirdo who will talk to a 13 year old girl and then agree to meet her on a date, is most likely a ped0 and a danger to the society

but an average guy surfing porn after work and clicking on some dubious link - having his house raided and facing up to 10 years in prison is too much IMO..

Only in America!

congrats ... and please start more threads like europe and europeans are fucked ... thanks god i am living in europe ...

the next thing, all the google search queries will be reported to the FBI and then they'll have to arrest 100's of thousands peoply daily who searched for "illegal teen porn" or "underage sex" etc...

edit.. and everyone searching for "offshore banking" will be recorded by the IRS :error

thats fine in theory, but when dealing with laws and crimes, you first need to break a law to be charged with a crime. it is not a crime to click a link nor is it a crime for an adult to converse with a child via internet. it IS a crime to pick up a kid for sexual favors and IS a crime to kidnap someone, but not click a link. You label them a pedo, when they have no commited sexual assault against a child.

in most instances, entrapment is when no crime was actually commited but cop got you to go along with him and then you are charged.

no crime commited, no law broken, = no charge

you cant just lock people up because you entrap them. And this is proven by entrapment cases being won all the time in US.

That's a good point, relly :thumbsup

somebody can even click some ad by mistake
and he'll get busted and get accused of who knows what...

btw i can see the police stings ... making popunders with 17 years old jailbait photos and lets fill the jails! only without internet you will be safe in usa ... again, thanks god i am living in europe ...

The worse thing about this is the FBI did not record the referring sites in their logs. Someone could be sent to their links by an automatic redirect. Also all they used was IP addresses to track someone down and convict them. What if your kid was on the computer and clicked on a link or a neighbor was on your wireless network? So many holes in this, he must have had a real shitty Attorney.

Or they could click it to report it

Good one LOL ...

important part:

notice how they drop the "destroying evidence" charge but stick with "clicking illegal link"

lol

clicking illegalk link has to be about the funniest Federal charge ive ever seen.

in addition he was charged with a thumbs.db file wow that can be picked up anywhere, they have no real CP charge against him.

Police State!

the thing that really pisses me off when reading these news stories is you come across this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/28/ar...ref=television

fucking rapper bought machines guns, and silencers from FEDERAL AGENTS - he will barely serve any jail time, gets to travel the country "talking to kids about danger of guns" and laughs with the judge and prosecutors as sentence is being read. yes, the judge joked with him as read sentence. he is rewarded with TV show and makes a lot of money off his crime.

Meanwhile someone who clicks a link on a webpage gets hit with more jail time than some piece of shit thug.

totally fucking amazing

Name one instance where someone was arrested merely for talking to a child on the Internet.

As far as entrapment is concerned, it would probably help if you had a clue what the legal definition of entrapment is. "entrapment occurs whenever a police officer or other government agent deceives an innocent person into committing a crime he or she had no prior intention of committing."

Obviously if the clicked the link, they had the intention.

Some very innocent people are going to wish they had never bought a computer.

It truly is becoming the "gate way" to hell.

This is truly madness. This is the type of thing that can be used to entrap just about anyone the government does not like. 10 years for clicking a link???

I use a laptop with the finger pad and when just moving the mouse to another
part of the page I accidently click links very often. I don't know what link
was even clicked until the page opens.

So just clicking the link seems to be a bit much.

I mean, signing up as a member to a site that has pedo written all over it and then
clicking the download link is a different story.

The "illegal" link should have to be "hunted for"; it can't just pop up in a window or
be embeded on a innocent looking page.

I should "Rick Roll" you with one of those links and then get your NEW opinion
after the cops show up.

it can't be so easy I think!
they have to be sure John Doe was the one that clicked in the link, even if you live alone they need to have ENOUGH EVIDENCE more than being the "owner" of the house since anyone else could have clicked in the link (the maid that cleans while you go to work, your buddy that asked for your laptop to send an email, even the dog -yes anyone can be a dog on the Net- or any member of your family).
The NBC predator series have more validity since its the "actual" person that goes looking for an encounter. The NY and Nevada busting op should be illegal

by the way, Americans move to another country, the US is becoming a paranoid place and scapegoat hunting country, too bad your bill of rights and civil rights are in the worst time in history

fbi and customers: both are sick

Plus the lawyer fee's will bankrupt you, but with a good lawyer you would get probation. It just sounds way to extream to me, but my mind might change in a couple of years when I start having kids.

I have heard of other links that get gang members to come to a location...and the cops round them up.

Only in America as someone else mentioned!

Unsophisticated and gullible individuals such as yourself always make me sad, your support of this will only lead to more entrapment initiatives.

You honestly accept a world where a guy can misspell a url in the address bar, impatiently wait for the browser to load(clicks the mouse button for instance out of habit), turn around and give his wife a message, keep clicking the mouse not thinking about it, and *boom*, land 10 years in jail... oh yeah that makes sense, let's have more of that. </sarcasm>

There's like a billion unlucky scenarios that can and will occur, if dickheads like you support idiotic initiatives like this... Plz go kill yourself, in the most painful way you can think of...

so no one can paste that link? :)

smart idea ...coming from the f b i

I don't know all the details, but the guy was probably hanging out on some cp forum, he clicked a clearly labeled link, etc
you don't accidentally go to a cp forum and accidentally start downloading a 100MB file...

These guys are not stupid, obviously they set it up in a way that makes sense...

Nevermind those that actually make searches and grab links to report them :S

better not let anyone at your house use your PC!!
That cousin staying over for the week end, wanting to check his Email might get you 10 years! :1orglaugh

This is what I don't get...

How can they say he was trying to destroy evidence? The articles said he came to the door and they said it was about a car. If they claimed he was destroying evidence but couldn't prove it, how can anything else they say be trusted?

I agree.

There is a huge difference between some Pedo who thinks he's chatting to a minor and then drives sixty miles to meet her with booze and condoms in his car. It's another thing to arrest someone for clicking on a link.

Welcome to the newest fascist state.

are they gonna start arresting the Google execs too? surely their spiders clicked the link. they should fry too!

i dont even know why they run stings like this other than cops trying to show themselves off to people

why not just use any p2p and scan for people sharing this crap? create a fake CP forum and arrest the posters, but just clicking on a link?

thats like going to the ghetto and dropping a huge bag that says 'Free Crack' then arresting people for looking inside

Exactly. I am no fan of entrapment but this sentence in the article is being ignored by many.

If they keep these stings focused on the places known for being involved in these types of activities I don't have a major problem with it.

The problem is at this point they may be working on a known k/p board but whats next? Random mailing of links etc? Will the Feds abuse this approach. I would guess yes.

Google already stores and has been storing records of all your searches in their ever growing database. Without their cookie which contains unique identifier, the search engine will refuse to work.

Yea, that's pretty fucked up. Too many ways for this system to be abused.

They raided Google Bot?

Or posting fake links on GFY :thumbsup :1orglaugh :helpme

They should use any means at there disposal to take these creeps off the face of the planet.

should have used truecrypt...

Agreed. This hits a new low of pathetic for the agency. How fucking lazy do government workers have to become?

Entrapment is legally defined as CREATING crimes when no predisposition (no previous intent) exists. Setting up a trap to snag those with a predisposition to commit certain crimes have been ruled time and time again to fall outside of the legal definition of entrapment. See http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/entrapment

Entrapment = setting up automatic popup windows or automatic downloads of illegal materials without the surfer's knowledge or awareness

Not entrapment = facts of this case

Seems like a lot of potential for abuse. Someone could get the URL and then post it on boards in a text link as something else just to fuck people up.